"Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre productions. In spite of increased advertising, we are attracting fewer and fewer people to our shows, causing our profits t

Instituting a ’Shakespeare in the Park’ programme might attract new audience members resulting greater profit might hold true, but this author’s argument is not fully providing convincing reasons which has rife of loopholes which might otherwise argue.

The author is assuming that despite of a lot of advertisements Classical Shakespeare Theatre productions is not able to attract new customers. This assumption is flawed in itself because it doesn’t provide a clear answer on where the advertisement has been targeted. Had the advertisement been targeted in a place where there were people with little interests in theatre or not at all, the advertisement makes no sense to attract new customers. Thus this assumption would have been better supporting the argument if it had clearly mentioned the target group where the advertisement has been advertised. More importantly, the idiosyncrasy of people might have been changed over the past ten years with less people having interests in theatre.

Furthermore, the author has not mentioned about whether the influx of people is due to the location of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre itself. Had it been in a location that is very inconvenient for the people to reach, then the advertisement only would not help to create influx of people at the shows. If that has been the case, then neither advertising nor instituting a ’Shakespeare in the Park’ program would help attract more and more people to the show. Therefore, it would be more relevant to ask question and get answer whether the location of ‘Classical Shakespeare Theatre’ is auspicious to attract more people to shows.

Additionally, the author is making comparison with nearby Avon Repertory Company which seems quite unreasonable. First reason being the time which was performed two years back which might not be as relevant in today’s date. Another reason being that the two companies might be totally different. The target audience for ‘Avon Repertory Company’ might be different from those of the ‘Classical Shakespeare Theatre’. One should never reach into a conclusion without being sure whether others’ making success fall into his/her own category of business before taking any actions into consideration.

Conclusively, based on the author’s assumption the the likelihood of increasing profit by the ‘Classical Shakespeare Theatre Productions’ only by instituting a ’Shakespeare in the Park’ program might fall apart. Instead rethinking about the target group of audience for advertisement, location of the theatre itself and reasonable comparison with ‘Avon repertory Company’ whether it falls on like category needs to be answered lucidly to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result.